Some people play “20 Questions” in the car. Others listen to NPR. My favorite thing to do while zipping down the freeway is to try and save journalism. In this endeavor, I rack my brain, trying to figure out what kind of monetization model will protect the investigative journalism that has, for decades, kept our country (and our constitution) intact. Free may be the reigning model in regards to information, but not all Free information is created equal.
I don’t know what the answer is. I do, however, have some fresh thoughts about the whole dilemma after reading the opinions of Anderson, Godin, Cuban and Gladwell. Let’s start with, “They asked for it.”
Many of my journalism colleagues, as little as four years ago, were still adamantly insisting that even if papers became less popular, reporting would still exist just as it had for decades. Papers might be shaken to the core, but would survive the quake. These smart-yet-blind friends scoffed when I suggested that Internet delivery of the news would replace papers.
What they couldn’t see was that information had gone from scarce, to abundant. That, in Anderson’s words, newspapers had lost their “monopoly on consumer attention.” Why? Because those consumers were spending more and more time online.If journalists had only checked their self-righteous indignation, and thrown all of that energy into quickly learning how to provide digital delivery of the news, they may have fended off the onslaught of citizen journalism more successfully.
Instead, their denial and downright defiance inspired a backlash of bloggers and chat-room mavens to confiscate the role of town crier. When that happened, the crowds realized their collective wisdom, and it was the beginning of the end for journalism, as we know it.
Just because the paper dies, however, does not mean that journalism is headed for the ICU. I agree with Cuban that newspapers with solid brand value – the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, even our beleaguered P-I – should carefully select where and when their digital content is offered Freely, without giving in to the demands for no-strings distribution by new media evangelists. In this way, reputable media companies can protect the value of their brand and, hopefully, garner an audience for the kind of online content that is becoming more scarce in the wake of the news wars – investigative reporting.
Digital delivery of pithy, in-depth, and even scandalous news that is relevant to my life? Now that, I would pay for.
